I don't have any question they do that. While it may seem contradictory, I think it's smart in the long-run. It enhances the Packers already good/great reputation with UDFAs who do have a choice about which team they sign with (there examples of players and agents saying they signed with the Packers because they give them legit shots to make the team). And in the future if Blanchard is available and the Packers are in need of a backup QB, he probably would strongly consider them if he views his early release as a favor.
That's an important observation.
On one level, players are viewed as building blocks and chess pieces, both here and in the front office, especially when it comes to cap considerations and bottom-of-the-roster covering-of-the-bases in the "it's a business" aspect of roster construction...and it is a construction. The player is a commodity at
one level, for every football organization, or any worker in any organization at all.
What we can't fully appreciate, except at a remove and via second hand information, are the personal relationships that are built around the work-at-hand. It's not about this guy or that guy being a "nice guy", or even about that at all...it's about guys who exhibit a love of the game and "doing the right things" in the work of football...mutual respect for the work.
I think it does go beyond planting seeds for players considering a bounce-back when the Packers are in need, although that's certainly a byproduct of core values: draft-and-develop on a foundation of work ethic, love of the process, love of the game.
Myles White is another one of those guys who stands out to me, from what I can tell from the outside, as a prime example of this equation at work. From early on, he looked to me like a guy who just loves to play. The whole calculus was neatly packed into McCarthy's recent comment regarding White, saying something to the effect, "he's a guy you'd like to see succeed," a statement laden with the balance between player-as-commodity and core values.
However, we don't want to get too touchy-feely about the process. I think it's fair to say teams with quite different core values can achieve success. I think it's fair to say Belichick is more a player-as-commodity guy, with an annual rotation of rent-a-players and scheme modifications to accommodate them. He doesn't shy away from big egos...those guys can certainly work even if their love of the game and the process is not "pure". A superior athlete who's on-field motivation is an ego-driven desire to just whip the guy on the other side can be a powerful weapon, whether it's Moss or the Revis Island. If those players are further motivated by a paycheck, big market exposure, resume building in a winning organization that leads to the next contract, or the shot at a ring, those can be powerful incentives with certain personalities.
If the idea is to win football games, I wouldn't put one approach over another. The proof is in the putting. The key is having an overriding philosophy that results in winning, and staying true to one's self.
